Posts Tagged ‘Halloween (franchise)’

Once again, I am releasing my review of the first episode of AHS a day late because that show is on after ten, and I try to be in bed or getting ready for bed by that time because I get up early for work. My apologies if you were waiting with baited breath for my review or you think I’m too late to give my opinion. One day, God willing, I’ll be able to write full-time, and then I can stay up late and give my opinions on this show right after the episode airs.

AHS: 1984 takes place in California in–you guessed it–the summer of 1984. Several good-looking twenty-somethings, including the shy and sweet Brooke, played by Emma Roberts, take on jobs at a small summer camp to avoid the 1984 Summer Olympics. However, they don’t realize until they get there that the camp was the site of a horrific massacre by Mr. Jingles, a Vietnam vet who went mad and killed nine campers and counselors. Oh, and the one survivor is now the camp director. And the camp just happens to be opening the day after Mr. Jingles escapes from the hospital he’s been staying at since his trial.

So if it’s not obvious, American Horror Story is getting on the 80’s nostalgia bandwagon this season. But unlike everyone else taking up this trend, AHS is doing it not just by paying homage to the 1980s–particularly to slasher films like the Friday the 13th and Sleepaway Camp franchises, as well as the Halloween films–but satirizing it in a loving way that only AHS can deliver. One of the very first scenes takes place in a sexy aerobics class, which is then followed by discussion of the Night Stalker, Richard Ramirez, and then…well, I won’t spoil it. Let’s just say an equal mix of camp and horror, though without being as annoying as it was in Coven.

I will say though, it looks like this season is set up to be a camp slasher film told over ten episodes, during which the show will both follow and upset the normal tropes of this sort of film (looking at you, gas station attendant warning of doom trope). And so far, it’s good. The humor and horror worked well together, and you love all the 80’s music and callbacks to the culture of that decade. It’s like the show’s filmmakers are saying, “Yeah, we know 80’s is saturating everything, so we’re going to shove it in your face and have fun with it too.”

The acting isn’t too bad, either. I completely forgot Cody Fern was Michael Langdon, aka the Antichrist, last season, and totally believed he was Xavier, an aerobics teacher/aspiring actor. But really, the true stars are the female leads. Emma Roberts as Brooke is a nice change of pace from her previous roles in the series, usually bitchy characters or half-repentant con artists, and she embodies the quiet girl most likely to survive very well. Still, I’m betting there’s hidden depths to this character, possibly even bloody ones, and I look forward to seeing them. Billie Lourd and Leslie Grossman as Montana and Margaret, respectively, are also great. Lourd’s Montana is supposed to represent the party girl trope, while Grossman’s Margaret is a holier-than-thou uber-Christian type, but I can already tell, there’s more to these characters than meets the eye. Montana’s already proven that in the first half of the episode.

On a scale of 1 to 5, I’ll give the season premiere of AHS: 1984 a 4.5. There’s nothing that’s uber-scary or unsettling yet, but the premise and set up is strong and I’m looking forward to seeing what comes next. And I think you will too.

And at the very least, you’ll probably like this more than the Friday the 13th remake. Because as we all know, that was a crock of shit film out of Michael Bay’s ass and accented with the desperation of men who need to write boobs into a film in order to see them IRL. That’s right, I found another opportunity to make fun of that piece of crap film, and I won’t stop until we get a new Friday the 13th film that does the franchise justice! You’re welcome, Internet!

That’s all for now, my Followers of Fear. As per usual, you can expect me to review the season as a whole after the final episode airs. Until then, and until my next post, I would like to wish you a good night and pleasant nightmares.

Halloween (2018) poster

This past weekend, the new Halloween movie was released and eager horror fans, including myself, flocked to theaters to see it (see my review of the film here). At the time I’m writing this, the film has made over 103 million bucks, nearly seven times it’s original budget. This definitely counts as a financial success for the film and its producers, and it’s all but certain at this point that a sequel will be greenlit. This has many horror fans speculating on a particular question: is the slasher genre coming back, bigger and badder than ever?

Now in case you stumbled on this post by accident and have no idea what a slasher is, let me explain: slasher, also occasionally known as splatterpunk, is a sub-genre of horror that focuses on violent deaths and gore, as well as the prospect of those occurring, as the source of its terror and tension. Slashers were really big in the 1980s, but declined as the many sequels kept going for more ridiculous kills and even more ridiculous plots. There were some brief flare-ups of good slashers in the late 90s and early 2000s, with films like Scream, Urban Legend and Wes Craven’s New Nightmare¬†and remakes of franchises like 2003’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Rob Zombie’s Halloween, but for the most part it didn’t stick. Recently, slashers have done well in television format with shows like Slasher and Scream (yes, based on the film I mentioned a sentence ago), but Halloween‘s the first in years that’s managed to satisfy this many fans, critics, and bank accounts.

Hollywood can be a very reactive sort of place: anything that’s proven to be even slightly successful will be copied over and over again by movie studios until long after audiences have lost interest. So with Halloween doing so well and sequels definitely being discussed in boardrooms, can we expect more slasher reboots and remakes on the horizon? Which ones? And is this the first of a slasher renaissance similar to their first wave of popularity in the 1980s?

Well, there are actually a few slasher movies being developed right now based on the older franchises. Child’s Play, which first introduced the character of living doll Chucky, is getting both a reboot and a TV series, and A Nightmare on Elm Street has had a new remake in development for a while now. But with the success of Halloween, there’s a chance the studios producing them will give them more attention and funding than they might’ve had without Halloween.

Please bring back Friday the 13th! Jason and I both want to see a comeback for the franchise!

And I don’t think it’s too far-fetched to say other series will be getting new films. There has been talk for years of rebooting Friday the 13th with my boy Jason Voorhees. Recently a court case regarding the original film was resolved, and basketball player-turned-actor and producer Lebron James, who is as big of a fan of the franchise as I am, has come forward saying he would like to help produce the film. And while Lebron’s still new to Hollywood, I would welcome his involvement in a new Friday the 13th film. Sometimes it takes the perspective of a fan, especially one who has more power than expressing outrage through a keyboard, to truly give a character or franchise new life.*

And after the crappy 2009 remake, almost anything would be welcome. Seriously, what was with that film? It felt like the filmmakers were making porn, then making a raunchy comedy, and then remembered to put Jason in it! By the time the final third rolled around, I was bored! I’m seriously considering destroying a copy of the film on DVD when its tenth anniversary rolls around, it’s that bad!

But not just Friday the 13th: there’s room for other franchises to get new films. I think a Hellraiser reboot would be great, as the series has devolved into cheap, direct-to-DVD sequels. A proper remake would give the series’ concept the fresh rebirth it needs. Of course, I’d love to see some new Freddy Kreuger, as there’s still so much to do with that character. And I think given our current social/political climate, a director like Jordan Peele could do something great with the character of Candyman.

But there should also be original works, not just remakes and reboots. As you’re reading this, there are plenty of filmmakers out there with fresh ideas for the slasher genre that should be given a chance. Perhaps with the success of Halloween, studios will be willing to give them a chance. Heck, maybe Jason Blum and Blumhouse, one of the companies that produced Halloween, can use this to recruit some female directors to develop some new projects.**

Perhaps we can see all these dudes, and then some, get new films.

And as for if this is the beginning of a slasher renaissance, we’ll just have to wait and see. One film doesn’t indicate a genre’s comeback. Sometimes several films don’t mean a particular genre or sub-genre is going to be the next big thing (*cough* YA dystopia and fantasy films *cough*). It’ll take several successful films, both originals as well as remakes and reboots, before we can really say if the slasher genre is back with a vengeance.

Still, I’m hopeful. I didn’t think until the trailer that anyone could bring Halloween back. Perhaps with the right writers and directors, we could see the return of the genre. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Until then though, we’ll just have to content ourselves with Halloween, the old classics, and this awesome little video (sorry, couldn’t help but post it. Enjoy).

*And if you do end up producing a new Friday the 13th film Mr. James, can I help? I love Jason too, and I’d love to see him given a film worthy of his franchise. Perhaps I can help write the script? I have ideas.

**Sorry Mr. Blum. I love your work, and I even sent a resume to your company after I graduated, but you really put your foot in your mouth with that “lack of female directors” comment. I mean really? One article found 30 female directors who can do horror! Perhaps Halloween‘s success means a chance to start fixing that fiasco and bringing them on board.

When this film was first announced, people weren’t sure what to say. They were especially wary after hearing that a comedy director was helming the film. But then Jamie Lee Curtis and John Carpenter, two of the people who were such instrumental parts of the original Halloween’s success, signed on for the film, and people thought this could be something. And then the trailer for Halloween dropped, and it became a contender for Horror Film of the Year. Today I went with a friend to see if this was worth all the hype.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the Halloween film we’ve been waiting years for.

Taking place forty years after the original film’s events in 1978, Halloween erases all the previous sequels and sets a new course (so yeah, Michael’s no longer related to Laurie Strode). Laurie is a mother and grandmother still living in Haddonfield but extremely shaken by her experiences as a teen and has lived her life preparing for a possible reunion with Michael Myers, at the expense of her relationship with her daughter. Michael, on the other hand, has been in custody for all these years, and is about to be transferred to another, much harsher facility. Of course, the night he’s being transferred, on October 30th, he escapes. Thus begins a night of terror as Michael makes his way back to Haddonfield for another night of terror.

I think this film’s greatest strengths lie in its storytelling and its cast. Rather than going for an overly-loud approach like the Rob Zombie remakes, Halloween instead goes for a more human approach, focusing more on Laurie’s relationship to Michael and to her family and how Michael continues to influence the Strode family and vice versa. At the same time, it weaves in a strong suspense story that knows how to show its kills. Many kills are only shown off-screen, after they’ve occurred, or from the victim’s perspectives. The ones that are shown on-screen are for the most part the ones that have maximum effect on the audience, and believe me, they will leave you shaking. Add in a few surprising twists and some great callbacks to the original Halloween and you have quite a thrill ride.

And yes, Michael is portrayed as menacing and as hard to penetrate as he was in the first film. Thank God they didn’t try to humanize him like they did in the sequels and in the remakes.

And as I said, the cast is extremely strong. Curtis returning as Strode is given a significant role, which gives her plenty of room to show off her acting chops. She’s believable as a woman suffering from PTSD.. You get the sense from her that Michael is always with her, even if his physical form is in chains and behind walls. Judy Greer as Karen, Laurie’s daughter, does a great job of portraying a woman who is trying to have a normal life after a pretty messed-up childhood and wanting better for her family. I liked watching the character at first trying to be the antithesis of her survivalist mother, insisting the world is a nice place full of love and goodness at one point,* and then completely changing after realizing her mother was always right and did everything out of love for her. And Andi Matichak is a great new introduction as Allyson, Laurie’s granddaughter who wants a relationship with her grandma despite the latter’s problems. You see her sort of go through Laurie’s journey from the original film, albeit with a few changes. If there are sequels,** it’ll be interesting what changes her character goes through and what she’ll be put through.

I can’t think of anything in particular that the film does wrong. Some of the humor in the film does feel a little out of place, like it doesn’t belong. I laughed at it, but still.

All in all though, Halloween is a great return for the franchise and its silent lead. On a scale of 1 to 5, I’m giving it a 4.4. Buy yourself a ticket, and prepare yourself. This Halloween, you’re going to be scared.

*Apparently Karen doesn’t watch the news that much.

**Yes, they do leave some doors open for sequels. Not going to say how, but they do.